Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

Summary:

Issues of Conflict of Interest should be reviewed with candidates and their eligibility to run for officers.

Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

Charlette 05 May 2008 09:10

Given there are numerous community issues involving the city I think we have to seriously review candidates for any conflict of interest.
Frankly, I would have to oppose Tim Durkan's candidacy given he is a paid Advisor for the Mayor.

If we are to gain public trust in the council and to ensure that officers and committees are "independent, impartial, and responsible to the community" we should have a strong Conflict of Interest policy which should be fiercely upheld.

Recommend IRS policy be incorporated into bylaws:
"The purpose of the conflict of interest policy is to protect this tax-exempt organization's (Organization) interest when it is contemplating entering into a transaction or arrangement that might benefit the private interest of an officer or director of the Organization or might result in a possible excess benefit transaction. This policy is intended to supplement but not replace any applicable state and federal laws governing conflict of interest applicable to nonprofit and charitable organizations."

Re: Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

jseattle 05 May 2008 13:32

The challenge in what you are suggesting, Charlette, is determining how and where to fairly draw the line. Should we make rules that no city employee can be an officer on the council? At this point in our development, we need all the help we can get.

Re: Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

Charlette 05 May 2008 21:44

Justin, are you suggesting we compromise the council's ethics to garner a few members? If so then I have to question your judgement. There shouldn't be a question as to where to draw the line, those lines and rules are already defined in IRS policy for non-profits and basic corporation laws. Surprised this is not already in the bylaws yet. If there is an obvious conflict of interest we stand to lose the public's confidence if we do not address them. This is already happening by comments from members.

Suggest we defer voting so we can obtain a strong candidate pool and establish a minimum number of members who vote from the community. Otherwise it looks like we stacked the candidates and votes.

Re: Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

seattleroots 29 May 2008 22:22

EXCLUDING community members from the community council is against the council's objective (read the bylaws as to who is regarded as a member of the community council). We need a representation of all members of the community not just handpicked ones by you or I. I was singled out by members of this council for being in the Real Estate industry (because it was assumed that I would be pro-development). Especially as Board Members, your job is to "fight fair", to be unassuming of individuals and their backgrounds, and above all diplomatic. I see no diplomacy on shaking fingers before you even meet the man or hear what he has to say. I think that in itself is compromising the council's ethics and discourages people (like me) from continuing to be actively interested in this committee.

Re: Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

Charlette 31 May 2008 03:50

I for one do not recall anyone being excluded from the community council or even the nominations. Tim Durkin is still on the ballot and anyone else I'm sure who hasn't stated an intent to withdraw.
It is certainly the right of any member to oppose a nomination based on established nonprofit guidelines established by the IRS and I don't mind fairly challenging Tim Durkin on that note. (And for the record I did hear his speech at the Capitol Hill Arts Center before I made my opposition and I did ask him questions.)

Yes, there are many members even currently who work for the city and real estate arena (and there are provisions for that when it comes down to voting) but I want to point out there is a BIG difference in being a general city employee or real estate agent and being a directly paid advisor for the Mayor.

If you felt you were singled out it was not by I and hope you will consider still attending the meetings and running a future committee.

I have felt and still feel that the open candidate period from April 9th to the 17th (eight short days) since it was first publicly announced and closed was way too short.
I am hoping the updated bylaws will define a fair application period.

Re: Conflict of Interest review with Candidates

Charlette 06 Jun 2008 08:59

At the election meeting the topic of Conflict of Interest was brought up.
I would like to point out that the current bylaws state:
"5. Elected Officers - Elected Officers and appointed representatives may not use their authority with the intent or for the purpose of personal, political, or financial gain."

Suggested bylaw regarding Conflict of Interest forwarded to me by Chris Lehman:
Conflict of Interest:
A conflict of interest exists if a member of the Board of Directors receives financial compensation, accepts employment with or is under professional contract to the Council. It is the obligation of Board members to notify the Executive Committee in writing if a potential or perceived conflict of interest or duality of interest arises during their term of office. Reimbursement of a Board member’s expenses, honoraria for speaking or program grants are not considered a conflict of interest. A conflict of will also exist if any board member is directly employed by or related to any party having an interest that is adverse or potentially adverse to the purposes of the Council. Such Board member shall disclose to the Board in writing the existence of such conflict an may not participate in debate or in voting on matters affecting the parties to the conflict, unless such conflict is waived by a majority of the Board.